MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026992205 · doi:10.1139/x03-164

Crown rise due to competition drives biomass allocation in silver birch

2003· article· en· W2026992205 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sakari Ilomäki, Eero Nikinmaa, Annikki Mäkelä

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersForskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd
KeywordsCrown (dentistry)Basal areaBiomass (ecology)Betula pendulaCompetition (biology)Diameter at breast heightAllometryBiologyRange (aeronautics)BotanyHorticultureMathematicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study tests the hypothesis that the aboveground structure of silver birch (Betula pendula L.) is derivable from crown rise across a range of social positions of trees. Data were measured in 30-year-old birch monocultures of three different initial spacings. As suggested by the pipe model, there was a strong linear correlation between the total cross-sectional area of branches and that of stem at crown base. Foliage mass correlated with stem basal area at crown base. An allometric relationship was found between foliage mass and crown length, and the mean length (weighted by basal area) of branches correlated linearly with crown length. Pipe ratios of branches and foliage were found to be independent of slenderness (= tree height / breast height diameter). The proportion of stem in aboveground biomass increased from 80% to 96% when the slenderness index increased, the proportions of branches and leaves decreasing, respectively. For crown biomass, the proportion of foliage was greater in the more slender stems, accompanied with a corresponding decrease in the proportion of stems, while the share of branches remained rather constant. The ratio of productive (foliage) and nonproductive (stem plus branches) biomass inside the crown was positively correlated with slenderness, but in the whole tree, the ratio declined with increasing slenderness. The results of this study support the theory of functional balance and seem to be in conflict with the priority principle of allocation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.700
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations98
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207